Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Member”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 361 records · Page 20
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2004

Bounding the risk of crew loss following orbital debris penetration of the International Space Station at assembly stages 1J and 1E

Orbital debris impacts on the International Space Station occur frequently. To date, none of the impacting particles has been large enough to penetrate manned pressurized volumes. We used the Manned Spacecraft Crew Survivability code to evaluate the risk to crew of penetrations of pressurized modules at two assembly stages: after Flight 1J, when the pressurized elements of Kibo, the Japanese Experiment Module, are present, and after Flight 1E, when the European Columbus Module is present. Our code is a Monte-Carlo simulation of impacts on the Station that considers several potential event types that could lead to crew loss. Among the statistics tabulated by the program is the probability of death of one or more crew members in the event of a penetration, expressed as the risk factor, R. This risk factor is dependent on details of crew operations during both ordinary circumstances and decompression emergencies, as well as on details of internal module configurations. We conducted trade studies considering these procedure and configuration details to determine the bounds on R at the 1J and 1E stages in the assembly sequence. Here we compare the R-factor bounds, and procedures could that reduce R at these stages. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of COSPAR.

Models, Theoretical↗
NASA NTRS2016

Orion GN&C Fault Management System Verification: Scope And Methodology

In order to ensure long-term ability to meet mission goals and to provide for the safety of the public, ground personnel, and any crew members, nearly all spacecraft include a fault management (FM) system. For a manned vehicle such as Orion, the safety of the crew is of paramount importance. The goal of the Orion Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) fault management system is to detect, isolate, and respond to faults before they can result in harm to the human crew or loss of the spacecraft. Verification of fault management/fault protection capability is challenging due to the large number of possible faults in a complex spacecraft, the inherent unpredictability of faults, the complexity of interactions among the various spacecraft components, and the inability to easily quantify human reactions to failure scenarios. The Orion GN&C Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR) team has developed a methodology for bounding the scope of FM system verification while ensuring sufficient coverage of the failure space and providing high confidence that the fault management system meets all safety requirements. The methodology utilizes a swarm search algorithm to identify failure cases that can result in catastrophic loss of the crew or the vehicle and rare event sequential Monte Carlo to verify safety and FDIR performance requirements.

Brown, Denise↗
NASA NTRS2003

Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Volume One

The Columbia Accident Investigation Board's independent investigation into the February 1, 2003, loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia and its seven-member crew lasted nearly seven months. A staff of more than 120, along with some 400 NASA engineers, supported the Board's 13 members. Investigators examined more than 30,000 documents, conducted more than 200 formal interviews, heard testimony from dozens of expert witnesses, and reviewed more than 3,000 inputs from the general public. In addition, more than 25,000 searchers combed vast stretches of the Western United States to retrieve the spacecraft's debris. In the process, Columbia's tragedy was compounded when two debris searchers with the U.S. Forest Service perished in a helicopter accident. This report concludes with recommendations, some of which are specifically identified and prefaced as 'before return to flight.' These recommendations are largely related to the physical cause of the accident, and include preventing the loss of foam, improved imaging of the Space Shuttle stack from liftoff through separation of the External Tank, and on-orbit inspection and repair of the Thermal Protection System. The remaining recommendations, for the most part, stem from the Board's findings on organizational cause factors. While they are not 'before return to flight' recommendations, they can be viewed as 'continuing to fly' recommendations, as they capture the Board's thinking on what changes are necessary to operate the Shuttle and future spacecraft safely in the mid- to long-term. These recommendations reflect both the Board's strong support for return to flight at the earliest date consistent with the overriding objective of safety, and the Board's conviction that operation of the Space Shuttle, and all human space-flight, is a developmental activity with high inherent risks.

SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA↗
NASA NTRS1973

The astronaut of 1988

Past space exploration history is reviewed for a projection of requirements in astronaut training and selection in 1988. The categories of talent required for those space missions are listed as test pilots and operational pilots for the test phase of programs; flight engineers and mechanics for Space Shuttle and Space Stations; medical doctors as experimentators and crew members; medical technicians and nurses for support medical service; veterinarians and veterinary technicians; physisits, chemists and geologists; and military men and administrators. Multinational crews and participation of both sexes are anticipated.

Slayton, D. K.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Aviation accidents and the theory of the situation

Social-psychological factors effecting the performance of flight crews are examined. In particular, a crew member's perceptual-psychological constructs of the flight situation (theories of the situation) are discussed. The skills and willingness of a flight crew to be alert to possible errors in the theory become critical to their effectiveness and their ability to ensure a safe flight. Several major factors that determine the likelihood that a faulty theory will be detected and revised are identified.

Bolman, L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Internal Architecture of the Common Habitat

The core stage liquid oxygen tank of the Space Launch System can be manufactured as a habitat instead of as a propellant tank, with a common design such that it is equally suitable for use in 0g, 1/6g, 3/8g, 1g, or variable artificial gravity. This Common Habitat can be the central element of a human spaceflight architecture that encompasses the Moon, Mars, and other destinations within the inner solar system. The Common Habitat is specifically used within an alternative architecture study (that is not part of the current NASA baseline) as the core habitation element within a Lunar Basecamp, Mars Basecamp, and the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. The Common Habitat internal architecture applies a design philosophy to separate crew functions according to deck. The lower deck is reserved for private functions. It includes eight private crew quarters and four waste and hygiene clusters – each with a private waste management compartment, private full body hygiene compartment, and foyer/clothes changing area. The mid deck is primarily allocated to mission-related working functions. It includes an exercise facility, fabrication / maintenance / repair facility, physical science laboratory (physics, geology, and astronomy), and life science laboratory (biology and human research). The mid deck also has four external hatches, clocked one every 90 degrees, centered on the vehicle vertical centerline. Each hatch has a 60-inch tall by 40-inch wide opening with the mid deck floor 16 inches below the bottom lip of the hatch opening. The upper deck is primarily allocated to group or social functions. It includes a large galley, wardroom with projector and display screen, plant growth chambers, bulk stowage, command and control station, medical facility, hygiene compartment, and vehicle subsystems. A Vertical Translation System, based in part on results from a GrabCAD public challenge, enables crew and equipment traverse between habitat decks in 0g, 1/6g, 3/8g, and 1g. A 40-inch by 60-inch vertical translation corridor ensures that anything that can fit through the external hatches can also be moved from deck to deck. The system includes three component systems: a deploying floor to safety barrier system that folds down to become a traversable floor when vertical translation is not in use and deploys to become a safety barrier during vertical translations; a folding ladder that stows in the ceiling when not in use; and an elevator platform that can attach to the ladder for cargo or incapacitated crew member transport. This system is complemented by a Horizontal Translation System, also based in part on the same GrabCAD challenge, provides for horizontal crew translation in microgravity but requires no vehicle reconfiguration for fractional or whole gravity operation. It relies primarily on gecko-inspired grippers, originally developed at Stanford and NASA JPL, attached to footwear to enable crew to emulate walking. Some handrails are also strategically placed throughout the Common Habitat to aid translation in both gravity and microgravity environments.

Common Habitat↗
NASA NTRS1997

The Effects of Liquid Cooling Garments on Post-Space Flight Orthostatic Intolerance

Post space flight orthostatic intolerance among Space Shuttle crew members following exposure to extended periods of microgravity has been of significant concern to the safety of the shuttle program. Following the Challenger accident, flight crews were required to wear launch and entry suits (LES). It was noted that overall, there appeared to be a higher degree of orthostatic intolerance among the post-Challenger crews (approaching 30%). It was hypothesized that the increased heat load incurred when wearing the LES, contributed to an increased degree of orthostatic intolerance, possibly mediated through increased peripheral vasodilatation triggered by the heat load. The use of liquid cooling garments (LCG) beneath the launch and entry suits was gradually implemented among flight crews in an attempt to decrease heat load, increase crew comfort, and hopefully improve orthostatic tolerance during reentry and landing. The hypothesis that the use of the LCG during reentry and landing would decrease the degree of orthostasis has not been previously tested. Operational stand-tests were performed pre and post flight to assess crewmember's cardiovascular system's ability to respond to gravitational stress. Stand test and debrief information were collected and databased for 27 space shuttle missions. 63 crewpersons wearing the LCG, and 70 crewpersons not wearing the LCG were entered into the database for analysis. Of 17 crewmembers who exhibited pre-syncopal symptoms at the R+O analysis, 15 were not wearing the LCG. This corresponds to a 21% rate of postflight orthostatic intolerance among those without the LCG, and a 3% rate for those wearing LCG. There were differences in these individual's average post-flight maximal systolic blood pressure, and lower minimal Systolic Blood pressures in those without LCG. Though other factors, such as type of fluid loading, and exercise have improved concurrently with LCG introduction, from this data analysis, it appears that LCG usage provided a significant degree of protection from post-flight orthostatic intolerance.

Billica, Roger↗
NASA NTRS1995

STS-71/Mir/Spacelab Mission Update

Live footage shows the crewmembers of STS-71 and Mir 18, Commander Robert L. Gibson, Pilot Charles J. Precourt, Mission Specialists Ellen S. Baker, Bonnie J. Dunbar, Gregory J. Harbaugh, MIR-19 crew upload Anatoly Solovyev and Nikolai Budarin, and MIR-18 crew download Norman E. Thagard, Vladimir Dezhurov, and Gennadiy Strekalov, on board the Russian Space Station Mir and the Atlantis spacecraft complex. The ten-member crew is shown participating in an interview. An animation of the undocking and fly-around of the Atlantis spacecraft is presented. Also shown is the commander of the STS-79 mission, discussing the undocking of the Atlantis Spacecraft.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2019

Common Power and Energy Storage Solutions to Support Lunar and Mars Surface Exploration Missions

Future human exploration missions on the moon and Mars will require a new generation of power sources to sustain crew members and leverage in-situ resources. Long-duration human missions to the lunar and Martian surface will likely include large-scale landers, crew habitats, pressurized rovers, and in-situ propellant production plants. The power demands for these surface elements, whether on the moon or Mars, will be similar starting with robotic precursor missions in the multi-kilowatt range scaling to 10s of kilowatts as the crew presence expands and local propellant production is established. While the power requirements may be similar, the vastly different environments on the two surfaces present unique challenges for power generation and storage systems. Candidate technologies to satisfy the surface power needs include deployable solar arrays, regenerative fuel cells, and small fission reactors. This paper presents strategies for power system architectures with elements that can be used on the moon and are extensible to Mars with features that make them resilient to either environment.

Mason, Lee↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human-Autonomy Teaming Research in Support of m:N Operations

Since 2019, the NASA and industry partners have been involved in research focused on a novel paradigm for operations of remotely piloted aircraft. This paradigm involves multiple people sharing a fleet of multiple vehicles between them. Referred to as m:N (pronounced “em-to-en”), this configuration describes a ratio where m is the number of operators and N is the number of vehicles. Through force and asset multiplication, the m:N concept seeks to enable a scalable and resilient operation of remotely crewed vehicles. The primary means of obtaining such a robust operation is through allowing a flexible crew of variable size to dynamically attend to the needs of assets in while performing real-time operator workload management. It is in that sense that assets are shared between operators: as needed (such as in events of elevated workload) an operator in an m:N context can “handoff” the responsibility for some amount of assets, nh < N, to be absorbed by the m – 1 crew members on staff. At some time later, these nh assets could be returned to their original owner or they may be further distributed to other crew if called for by the mission. During this panel, I will elaborate on the research activity undertaken by the Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center over the previous three years. The studies conducted by the HAT Lab range from interviews with subject matter experts, a cognitive walkthrough, a task analysis, and two simulation experiments to-date. During experimentation, pilots made use of an advanced Ground Control Station developed by the HAT Lab and industry partners to simulate m:N operations in two large, metropolitan areas of Southern California: Los Angeles and San Diego. Further experimentation planned over the next few years. Results from our research to-date indicates that pilots of a moderately sized fleet of about a dozen remotely crewed aircraft adequately maintained safety performance and situation awareness of their aircraft, even when presented with unexpected situations of heightened workload.

multi-vehicle control↗
NASA NTRS1973

Shuttle mission simulator requirements report, volume 1, revision C

The contractor tasks required to produce a shuttle mission simulator for training crew members and ground personnel are discussed. The tasks will consist of the design, development, production, installation, checkout, and field support of a simulator with two separate crew stations. The tasks include the following: (1) review of spacecraft changes and incorporation of appropriate changes in simulator hardware and software design, and (2) the generation of documentation of design, configuration management, and training used by maintenance and instructor personnel after acceptance for each of the crew stations.

Burke, J. F.↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Influence of Microbiology on Spacecraft Design and Controls: A Historical Perspective of the Shuttle and International Space Station Programs

For over 40 years, NASA has been putting humans safely into space in part by minimizing microbial risks to crew members. Success of the program to minimize such risks has resulted from a combination of engineering and design controls as well as active monitoring of the crew, food, water, hardware, and spacecraft interior. The evolution of engineering and design controls is exemplified by the implementation of HEPA filters for air treatment, antimicrobial surface materials, and the disinfection regimen currently used on board the International Space Station. Data from spaceflight missions confirm the effectiveness of current measures; however, fluctuations in microbial concentrations and trends in contamination events suggest the need for continued diligence in monitoring and evaluation as well as further improvements in engineering systems. The knowledge of microbial controls and monitoring from assessments of past missions will be critical in driving the design of future spacecraft.

Castro, Victoria A.↗
NASA NTRS1991

What makes a good LOFT scenario? Issues in advancing current knowledge of scenario design

An effort is made to ascertain which combinations of technical demands and crew coordination should be incorporated in training scenarios in order to maximize the effectiveness of training for crew members. Such high-fidelity simulation, which has come to be known as 'line-oriented flight training' or LOFT, involves the practice of both technical and crew coordination skills in a realistic setting, in conjunction with periodic reviews of performance via videotaped feedback. Attention is given to the integration of appropriate information, the measurement of objective task demands, the character of information from LOFT students, and the leeway allowed LOFT instructors.

Gregorich, Steven E.↗
NASA NTRS1996

STS-77 Flight Day 6

On this sixth day of the STS-77 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. John H. Casper, Pilot Curtis L. Brown, Jr., and Mission Specialists Andrew S.W. Thomas, Ph.D., Daniel W. Bursch, Mario Runco, Jr., and Marc Garneau, Ph.D., spend some time relaxing, then go back to working in the Spacehab module and preparing to revisit a small cylindrical satellite that they deployed on the mission's third day. Commander John Casper and Pilot Curt Brown monitor Endeavour's systems. Mission Specialist Mario Runco tests an attitude determination system using the GPS attitude and navigation experiment called GANE. The remaining crew members, Mission Specialists Andy Thomas, Dan Bursch and Marc Garneau monitor the health of experiments ongoing in the Spacehab and on the middeck of the orbiter. The crew also conduct a health check of the Aquatic Research Facility (ARF) which contains starfish, mussels and sea urchins.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2007

Crew Exploration Vehicle Launch Abort System Flight Test Overview

The Constellation program is an organization within NASA whose mission is to create the new generation of spacecraft that will replace the Space Shuttle after its planned retirement in 2010. In the event of a catastrophic failure on the launch pad or launch vehicle during ascent, the successful use of the launch abort system will allow crew members to escape harm. The Flight Test Office is the organization within the Constellation project that will flight-test the launch abort system on the Orion crew exploration vehicle. The Flight Test Office has proposed six tests that will demonstrate the use of the launch abort system. These flight tests will be performed at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico and are similar in nature to the Apollo Little Joe II tests performed in the 1960s. An overview of the launch abort system flight tests for the Orion crew exploration vehicle is given. Details on the configuration of the first pad abort flight test are discussed. Sample flight trajectories for two of the six flight tests are shown.

Williams-Hayes, Peggy S.↗
NASA NTRS1976

Crew health status and monitoring summary - The second manned Skylab mission

The evaluation of available medical data to determine the health status of the Skylab 3 crew members is discussed. The utilization of raw data from medical experiments during the course of the mission as a source of near-real time criteria for monitoring crew health is described. The percentage change of selected metabolic parameters, including calorie intake, Na intake, K intake, urine output, water intake, and body weight, from their pre-flight values, vectorcardiographic data, and results of the lower body negative pressure experiment provided a core of information upon which clinical judgements could be made. Minor clinical problems occurring during the mission are outlined.

Buchanan, P.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Smart Structures for Vibration Control on Long-Term Space Exploration and Habitation Missions

The current vision for space exploration focuses on human missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. To support these goals, it is certain that new vehicles and intermediate bases will be developed, whether that means simply re-direction of the ISS as a "mission research facility" or construction of a lunar base. Since these facilities are expected to be constructed from inherently light-weight materials, this work examines some of the potential sources of vibration and noise as well as means for controlling these vibrations. Many of the operating components within these facilities, such as pumps, fans, and motors, will produce vibrations during operation. These vibrations become structure in which they are housed. Resonances can impact acoustic noise levels and noise quality within the environment, possibly affecting crew health and productivity. For long-term missions in particular, it is expected that crew members will spend significant portions of their time restrained in the structure, such as in seats. As a result, the general health and well-being of the crew can be improved by limiting the harmful effects of human exposure to long-term audible and tactile vibration input. Besides the human factor, this work also examines some operational considerations in which vibrations play an important role. Vibrations can impact the environment for science and in-situ manufacturing research within these vehicles. Since a benign vibratory environment is beneficial for most types of science experiments, there is a need for various forms of vibration control. Because the operational characteristics of a vehicle can change during a long-term mission, it is further expected that the characteristics of many of the vibratory excitations will change with time. Consequently, the form of vibration control needed to improve overall habitability and usefulness of the vehicle or element for exploration missions will rely to some degree on the vibration control system's ability to adapt. To address these needs, this work also examines the development and use of smart materials to tune the dynamic characteristics of the structure in a passive sense. One prime example is the use of an adaptive electrical shunt connected to a piezoelectric patch in order to provide tuned passive vibration damping. The work also examines the use of active vibration control, such as by applying power to that same piezoelectric patch. The overall goal is to examine the use of smart structures that can react to the environment thereby improving the overall living, working, and learning environment for these long-term missions.

Gattis, Christy B.↗
NASA NTRS2005

STS-114 Flight Day 6 Highlights

Day 6 is a relatively quiet day for the STS-114 crew. The main responsibility for crew members of Space Shuttle Discovery (Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Stephen Robinson, Andrew Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, and Charles Camarda) and the Expedition 11 crew of the International Space Station (ISS) (Commander Sergei Krikalev and NASA ISS Science Officer and Flight Engineer John Phillips) is to unload supplies from the shuttle payload bay and from the Raffaello Multipurpose Logistics Module onto the ISS. Several of the astronauts answer interview questions from the news media, with an emphasis on the significance of their mission for the Return to Flight, shuttle damage and repair, and the future of the shuttle program. Thomas announces the winners of an essay contest for Australian students about the importance of science and mathematics education. The video includes the installation of a stowage rack for the Human Research Facility onboard the ISS, a brief description of the ISS modules, and an inverted view of the Nile Delta.

Source record↗